Evidence of the environmental impact of noise pollution on biodiversity: a systematic map protocol

Abstract

Background: For decades, biodiversity has suffered massive losses worldwide. Urbanization is one of the major drivers of extinction because it leads to the physical fragmentation and loss of natural habitats and it is associated with related effects, e.g. pollution and in particular noise pollution given that many man-made sounds are generated in cities (e.g. industrial and traffic noise, etc.). However, all human activities generate sounds, even far from any human habitation (e.g. motor boats on lakes, aircraft in the air, etc.). Ecological research now deals increasingly with the effects of noise pollution on biodiversity. Many studies have shown the impacts of anthropogenic noise and concluded that it is potentially a threat to life on Earth. The present work describes a protocol to systematically map evidence of the environmental impact of noise pollution on biodiversity. The resulting map will inform on the species most studied and on the demonstrated impacts. This will be useful for further primary research by identifying knowledge gaps and in view of further analysis, such as systematic reviews.Methods: Searches will include peer-reviewed and grey literature published in English and French. Two online databases will be searched using English terms and search consistency will be assessed with a test list. No geographical restrictions will be applied. The subject population will include all species. Exposures will include all types of man-made sounds (industrial, traffic, etc.) in all types of environments (or media) (terrestrial, aerial, aquatic), including all contexts and sound origins (spontaneous or recorded sounds, in situ or laboratory studies, etc.). All relevant outcomes will be considered (space use, reproduction, communication, abundance, etc.). An open-access database will be produced with all relevant studies selected during the three screening stages. For each study, the database will contain metadata on key variables of interest (species, types of sound, outcomes, etc.). This database will be available in conjunction with a map report describing the mapping process and the evidence base with summary figures and tables of the study characteristics.

What evidence exists on the effects of anthropogenic noise on acoustic communication in animals? A systematic map protocol

“…Anthropogenic noise has dramatically increased over the last decades as a result of population growth, urbanization, globalization of transportation networks, and expansion of resource extractions [1,2], making noise an intense, widespread anthropogenic disturbance. A growing body of evidence suggests that this noise may have highly detrimental impacts on natural populations, communities, and ecosystems [3,4].…”

Evidence of the impact of noise pollution on biodiversity: a systematic map

“…The method used to produce this map was published in an a priori peer-reviewed protocol by Sordello et al [36]. Deviations are listed below.…”

“…These metadata were coded according to an a priori codebook (see Additional file 6 in Sordello et al [36]) that was marginally adjusted. The final version of this codebook is included as a sheet in the provided database file (see below the corresponding Additional file 9).…”

“…This report presents a systematic map of evidence of the impact of noise pollution on biodiversity based on an a priori method published in a peer-reviewed protocol [36]. It describes the mapping process and the evidence base.…”

Using animal behavior in conservation management: a series of systematic reviews and maps

“…The recent publishing of protocols outside of this issue that cover aspects of conservation behavior (e.g. [18]), suggest the momentum and appetite for this type of evidence is growing. Comparative effectiveness evaluation must follow all of these initial analyses; once identified, the estimated costs and logistical challenges of effective strategies and interventions must be compared with other existing methods [19].…”